When did Freethought Cease in the Muslim World?

Yeh lahoo surkhee hai azaadi kay afsanay kee

echoboom: #156

I am writing precisely for your kind hoping one day you might appreciate my writings. In the meantime, hold your `fatwas` and open your sealed mind, if you can.

Mohammad Gill

Hum Mustafavi haiN

Recorded in 1974: Music Sohail Rana: Voice Mehdi Zaheer

story behind the event:

The Second Islamic conference was scheduled. Time was short. JamilUDDIn wrote the song and as you will notice that it is in ``rajaz`` meter. It was decided that either Umm-Kulsoom or subhaan [ the great singers from egypt] would be retained. Sohail Rana suggested that we should use our own talent. Mehdi Zaheer, of Radio pakistaN- A legend in his own lifetime both as a scholar and as an artist. His recorded songs in Arabic were already popular in the Middle East but he was himself pretty shy and evasive of publicity & commercialism.

The galloping and advancing of horses, after the introductrey [rajaz] which was a part of battle protocol and strict rule among arabs, is a masterpiece in music composition by a genius as well as singing by another genius.

Enjoy!

Pakistan ko Salgirah Mubarak ho.
PakistaaniON ko salgiraaH mubarak ho.
CHOWK ko salgirah mubarak ho.

If you are a kafir or murtid ( calling atheist , lacks the sting) then you do not have to worry about muslims. If you are still worrying for the benefit of muslims then you are a closet muslim and are really two-timing your clients.

In the meantime: propagate, publicise and promote so that we do not end up as ``red`` indians.

---

Islam ( and Muslims ) in ``new`` world.
Before 1800

1) The Navigator of Columbus, who during the famous voyage, brought along a copy of a travel narrative written by Portuguese Muslims who had sailed to the New World in the 12th century. The narrative by al-Idrisi was called ``The Sea of Tears``. In this narrative he discusses he voyage of 80 muhagharrun (explorers) who lived in Lisbon during the reign of the Murabit amir, Yusuf ibn Tashufin. In the narrative it mentions visits to fourteen islands. Over half of these islands were later traced to be in either the Canary Islands or the Azores. However, the ones not traced could have been as far away or the Azores. However, the ones not traced could have been as far away as the Caribbean. An early travel from 942 A.D. is mentioned in the Annuals of al-Mas`udi. (Aramco World, May-June 1992)

2) Istafan, the Arab, was a guide for the Spanish that wished to settle the area that would later be called Arizona in 1539. Istafan was from Azamor, Morocco and had previously been to the New World in the ill-fated expedition of Panfilo de Narvaez to Florida in 1527. Brent Kennedy mentions him in his article in Islamic Horizons as being one of the first Moors and Muslims in America. Istafan was one of four to survive a five thousand mile tour of the American Southwest. Originally he was part of a three hundred member exploratory group. He would go on to become the first visitor from Europe or Africa among the Pueblo Indians. (Islamic Horizons November/December 1994, pp.24-27). He was also a guide for the Franciscan friar, Marcos de Niza and was in this capacity until he was killed in an Indian attack in Arizona and New Mexico in 1539.

3) Another early Muslim in this period was Nasruddin. He is famous for having killed a Mohawk princess who refused to marry him and for being the earliest permanent Arab settlers in the New World. [History of Green County, N.Y., pp. 19-22.]

4) Ayub Sulaiman ibn Diallo became a go between for his people and the British after his repatriation. I mention him because he continued to practice Islam during his two years of slavery in the 1730`s in Maryland. He was versed enough in Arabic to write at least a half dozen letters in that language, translate coin inscriptions for the British Museum, and draw a map of West Africa writing place names in Arabic.

5) Salim the Algerian, who was a Muslim from a royal family of Algiers that studied in Constantinople. After returning from a visit to Constantinople, he was captured by a Spanish Man of War and later sold into slavery to the French in New Orleans. Eventually he became free after running from slavery, lived among American Indian tribes, and settled in Virginia. Salem was found in rags, almost naked, and was taught English. Eventually, it was ascertained that he knew Greek and he was given a Greek New Testament. Several future members of the U.S. Congress befriended him and he converted to Christianity. A new convert to Christianity he decided to go back home to spread the Gospel. After a disastrous journey to his homeland (where he was shunned as an apostate), he returned to America, met Thomas Jefferson, attended the 1st Continental Congress, and died an insane man having given-up his family and religion for America. While he was at the Congress his picture was painted by a Mr. Peale after the intervention of a member of the Congress Mr. Page. Near the end of Salem`s life, he regained his long lost sanity. He had been insane since his trip to his homeland after his conversion to Christianity. Some say he renounced Christianity, other say died a Christian at the Page estate, and still others say he died in an insane asylum. [Graham`s Magazine, 1857, pp. 433-437.] It should be noted that none of these men tried to spread Islam and only Ayub tried to preserve his own belief.

The Wahhab brothers were shipwrecked on the coast of North Carolina in the 1770`s. They settled married and started a farm. Their ancestors today own one of the largest private hotel chains in North Carolina. The only contemporary reference I have on them is a letter from the North Carolina historian Thomas Parramore. Whether they or their ancestors stayed in the Islamic faith is something that I can not answer at this time. Around this same time a ship of 70 odd Moorish slaves landed in Maryland. No more is known on these Moors.

An important point is that these Muslims were not unique in being able to read and write Arabic. In fact, in many slave quarters in the Caribbean and Brazil there were clandestine Arabic and Islamic schools. One can find references to these in the works by Nina Rodriguez and in the two volume book TWELVE MONTHS IN JAMAICA by Robert Madden (Phil.: Carey, Lea and Blanchard, 1835).

Dear misbashir:

I am not telling you or any body else to follow the western philosophers, thinkers, or the scientists; there is no harm in reading them and try to understanding what they are professing. Does it make sense? If it does, there is no harm in agreeing with them. That is an individual decision.

Philosophical concepts are temporal and not permanent (like the divine revelation). You have every right to disagree with these concepts, modify them, or ignore them as a result of your own independent thinking. It’s not blasphemous to do so. The essence of my paper was that the human mind should be open and not sealed. You should be able to think your own thoughts; your parents or religious leaders and others should not do the thinking for you or force you to think only in a particular way. You should have every right to say: Why? And why not?

Hume (Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it to then the flames. For it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.) did criticize metaphysics rather severely and for understandable reasons. Such a critique is desirable (in my view, you might disagree with me, which is okay) in order to bring the metaphysicians from the “other-world” down to earth.

Science does not have any thing to say regarding God (He does not play any role in science) or divine revelation. The scientific predictions can be actually verified; nobody needs to believe in science blindly.

Without conceiving new ideas, concepts and theories, no practical progress is feasible. These theories are not the result of divine revelation, people like you and I have to think, and think hard, about them and develop them. These ideas and theories are temporal and change when new evidence turns up, and mankind makes progress in this way.

There is nothing permanent and immutable; every thing is in a state of evolution. Even the concept of God went through numerous revisions, if you care to read history of the concept of God and find out for yourself. There should be no injunction on human thought. It’s not right to suggest that you can think only this and not that, for instance, for whatever reason. Unless you raise questions, human ideas and development do not progress. Every thing becomes stagnant.

Wishing you well,

Mohammad Gill

i read ur article and then decided 2 share some facts with u; i would appreciate if u comment on them:
1. to western scientists like descartes nature was nothing more than a machine which had no spiritual significance. all living things including man were a mere matter of automatic chemical reactions, he said` give me the elements and i will construct the universe.`
2. voltaire taught that God created the universe exactly as a watchmaker assembles a watch afterwards having no furthwer concern with it...hume rejected all religious beliefs on the ground that they could not b prved either scientific experiments on human reason. he attacked even the diest god of voltaire declaring that v have seen watches made but not worlds.
3. willaim james questioned the value of retaining the intangible concept of mind at all, regarding consciousness as merely the end result of chemical reactions upon the nervous system produced by externel; stimmuli.... pschologistrs like palov sought 2 delve in2 the motives of human behaviour by studying dogs ,monkeys and apes.
in short since the western scientists could not see ALLAH, angels ans satan with their telescopes so they decided that their existence was an accident.
R U TRYING TO TELL US THAT OUR BETTERMENT LIES IN FOLLOWING THESE WESTERN MINDS?

freethinker, macgupta.

The ``debate`` presented was semi-retarded. If indeed we are to take a no-brain etymological approach to democracy and define it as ``equity``, then we must conclude that it didn`t exist in greece (the alleged birthplace of democracy) for women, slaves, etc. were excluded.

Nor did it exist in the West untill 1960`s, 1970`s untill afro-americans were given full rights.

Western Democracy is `incompatible` with Islam *by definition*. Here it is important to realize that democracy is not a concept that exists outside of human action or experiance...it is a direct result of it.

Mr.mcgupta:

I forgot to mention that the western democracy is a secular form of government, which does not have a place in Islam anyhow, by virtue of its secularism. So the obvious contradiction is there. You need a very powerful, more powerful than Ata Turk, exegetist to reinterpret the Islamic spirit to make room for democracy in it.

Incidently, I mis-spelt ``Bando`n`` in my last post. I tried to correct it but the computer didn`t allow me to do so. The copmuters have personality of their own. Nonetheless, they are a great help.

Mohammad Gill

Mr. mcgupta:

The issue of democracy in Islam is quite complex. I had quoted Iqbal in some of my previous articles (or interacts). Two of his verses are as follows:

Jamhooriyat ikk tarz-e=hakoomat haiy keh jis mein
Band`n ko gina kartay hain, tola naheen kartay

(Democracy is a form of government in which the voters are counted, not weighed)

I am forgetting the first line (I can find it if you wanted it) of the second verse. The essence is conveyed in the second line which is:

Juda ho Din siyasat sey, tau reh jaati haiy Chingizi

(If religion [of Islam] is separated from the politics, the balance is the trait of Ginghiz [Khan])

There are many other verses by him. One of the other ones comes to mind but I cannot remember one word in it, so I will not bore you by quoting it. The point is that he was against the western democracy.

You can include democracy into Islam if you want it; it depends on the given situation. Taheri wanted to exclude it from Islam and he did it splendidly. If you think democracy is a good form of government, you can accomodate it in Islam (Islamize or Islamicize it).

The very first Caliph of Islam was (s)elected by a kind of referendum, which can be stretched to democracy, and is generally done. The second was nominated but accepted by a general consensus. The third and fourth were installed by majority consent. Afterwards, there was chaos.

Iskander Mirza (the first army President of Pakistan) once remarked, tell me when was democracy there in Islamic history? And there was a torrent of adverse criticism against his comments. But I believe, he was right.

The constitution of the (conceptual) Islamic State is the Law of Allah (the holy book) and His Viceregent on Earth is the Caliph, and the form of the government is Caliphate (Khilafat). The vestige of the last nominal khilafat was abolished by Kemal Ata Turk.

People can write (and they have written) long-winded and intellectually dense papers on the subject of democracy in Islam (which made me sick so far, I am still trying to make some practical sense out of them). Islam has become a `theoretical` religion, which is very good for writing papers; it`s extremely difficult to put into practice. Majority of the Muslims cannot agree on the definition of a Muslim. I believe this should be enough.

Thanks for your feedback.

Mohammad Gill

Will Chowkis care to comment on the following?
http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/4462

This is one side of the coin. What is the other side?
(I`m going to be strictly in lurk mode.)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Freethinking, open minds
open hearts, open arms
are meant to embrace
some time( any time!)
to fall in love
and never let go.

wandering spirits
(phantoms,ghosts)
seeking an abode
searching for peace
within, without!

[Echoboom]

---

In the evening of the second day we sat down as usual to an opulent dinner, and afterward a man from the village entertained us with ballads sung to the accompaniment of a three-stringed lute. He sang in Pashtu- a language which I did not understand - but some of the Persian words he used sprang up vividly against the background of the warm, carpeted room and the cold gleam of snow that came through the windows. He sang, I remember, of David`s fight with Goliath - of the fight of faith against brute power - and although I could not quite follow the words of the song, its theme was clear to me as it began in humility, then rose in a violent ascent of passion to a final, triumphant outcry.

When it ended, the Hakim remarked: `David was small, but his faith was great...`

I could not prevent myself from adding: `And you are many, but your faith is small.`

My host looked at me with astonishment, and, embarrassed by what I had almost involuntarily said, I rapidly began to explain myself. My explanation took the shape of a torrent of questions:

`How has it come about that you Muslims have lost your self-confidence - that self-confidence which once enabled you to spread your faith, in less than a hundred years, from Arabia westward as far as the Atlantic and eastward deep into China - and now surrender yourselves so easily, so weakly, to the thoughts and customs of the West? Why can`t you, whose forefathers illumined the world with science and art a time when Europe lay in deep barbarism and ignorance, summon forth the courage to go back to your own progressive, radiant faith? How is it that Attaturk, that petty masquerader who denies all value to Islam, has become to you Muslims a symbol of ``Muslim revival``?`

My host remained speechless. It had started to snow outside. Again I felt that wave of mingled sadness and happiness that I had felt on approaching Deh-Zangi. I sensed the glory that had been and the shame that was enveloping these late sons of a great civilization.

`Tell me - how has it come about that the faith of your Prophet and all its clearness and simplicity has been buried beneath a rubble of sterile speculation and the hair-splitting of your scholastics? How has it happened that your princes and great land-owners revel in wealth and luxury while so many of their Muslim brethren subsist in unspeakable poverty and squalor - although your Prophet taught that No one may call himself a Faithful who eats his fill while his neighbor remains hungry? Can you make me understand why you have brushed woman into the background of your lives - although the women around the Prophet and his Companions took part in so grand a manner in the life of their men? How has it come about that so many of you Muslims are ignorant and so few can even read and write - although your Prophet declared that Striving after knowledge is a most sacred duty for every Muslim man and woman and that The superiority of the learned man over the mere pious is like the superiority of the moon when it is full over all other stars?`

Still my host stared at me without speaking, and I began to think that my outburst had deeply offended him. The man with the lute, not understanding Persian well enough to follow me, looked on in wonderment at the sight of the stranger who spoke with so much passion to the hakim. In the end the latter pulled his wide yellow sheepskin cloak closer about himself, as if feeling cold; then he whispered:

`But - you are a Muslim...`

[Read this excerpt from ``road to Mecca`` by Mohammed Asad--former Jew, son of a Rabbi, Pakistan`s first permanent representative to UN. Translator of the holy Qura`an and author of many book/s]
here is the answer:click here

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

# Tumhari Arguments Main Kuch Gaps Haen. And, you aren`t the type to admit. Are you?